KYC answers who is verified
Identity policy determines whether and under what conditions a provider asks for identifying information or documents.
No KYC vs Non-Custodial Crypto Swaps
Separate identity verification from fund-control and custody models across connected-wallet, contract, solver, and deposit-based crypto routes.
What you need to know
Custody answers who controls funds
Custody analysis considers wallets, signatures, approvals, contracts, deposit addresses, provider control, refunds, and execution steps.
The properties are independent
A non-custodial service can still apply identity verification. A route without verification can still involve a provider deposit or another form of temporary control.
Connected-wallet routes
The user may sign from a self-controlled wallet, while contracts receive defined approval or execution authority. Read every prompt and verify the spender.
Deposit routes
The user sends to active provider instructions. This requires checking custody terms, provider identity, address, network, asset, amount, quote window, receipt, and recovery rules.
Why global claims are withheld
The current route snapshot does not expose definitive custody and KYC fields for every underlying tool, so Sasquatch qualifies both claims at route level.
Related routes
No KYC vs Non-Custodial Crypto Swaps FAQs
Can a non-custodial exchange require KYC?
Yes. Identity verification and fund custody are separate policies.
Does no KYC prove self-custody?
No. Review the exact fund path and provider terms.
Is a wallet signature automatically non-custodial?
Not by itself. Inspect contract authority, approvals, route steps, and provider control.